Predestination/"Free Will"

[rnmomof7]

Today at 07:07 PM Ragman said this in Post #260




Paul certainly did not preach Calvinism, nor did Jesus, Augustine did and I'll check on Luther.

Do you imply that when someone disagrees with Calvinism and you that they have not studied the Word, they are not approved?  I have studied.  I am approved, but I'm not approved because I have studied.  I am approved because the Son of God laid hold of me in His incarnation, became sin and gave me a share in His relationship with His Father.  This He has done for the entire human race.  This He has done....even for Calvinists!  This is our only hope.

Just a taste of the doctrine of grace in scripture

from Jesus
Mat 20:23 And he saith unto them, Ye shall drink indeed of my cup, and be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with: but to sit on my right hand, and on my left, is not mine to give, but [it shall be given to them] for whom it is prepared of my Father.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jhn 6:37__ All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.
__
_ Jhn 6:38__ For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me.
__
_ Jhn 6:39__ And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day.

Jhn 6:44__ No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jhn 6:27 Labour not for the meat which perisheth, but for that meat which endureth unto everlasting life, which the Son of man shall give unto you: for him hath God the Father sealed.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Act 4:28 For to do whatsoever thy hand and thy counsel determined before to be done
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Rom 8:30 Moreover whom he did predestinate , them he also called : and whom he called them he also justified and whom he justified , them he also glorified .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1Cr 2:7 But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery , [even] the hidden [wisdom], which God ordained before the world unto our glory
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eph 1:5 Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself according to the good pleasure of his will ,
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eph 1:11 In whom also we have obtained an inheritance , being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will :
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rom 8:14__ For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gal 1:15__ But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother's womb, and called [me] by his grace,
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Act 13:48 And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


It is the doctrine of the bible and it is the doctrine of the reformation

http://www.visi.com/~contra_m/cm/features2/cm98_bm_luther.html

 

[rnmomof7]

Today at 06:27 PM Aaron11 said this in Post #259

This raises serious questions about God. Why would God choose a person before they existed? Did he create some people just to go to hell? Or was God saying He chose those who will choose Him?

(In reference to predestination)

I think we as humans think that everything has to be earned..so how else would God choose.

The Bible tells us God selected the elect before they did either good or evil...It tells us that he chooses according to His good pleasure. It tells us He choses the foolish thing to confound the wise (that way the glory goes to him)
Why did He pick Abraham..Israel..

Why would God have to choose someone that already chose him? If God only chose those that chose him is that not a salvation by works and not grace?

The bible says that we should have nothing to brag about in our salvation..and if we earned it by a work..then we do have something to boast about don't you think?

 

[nikolai_42]

Yesterday at 08:39 PM rnmomof7 said this in Post #261



Just a taste of the doctrine of grace in scripture

from Jesus
Mat 20:23 And he saith unto them, Ye shall drink indeed of my cup, and be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with: but to sit on my right hand, and on my left, is not mine to give, but [it shall be given to them] for whom it is prepared of my Father.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jhn 6:37__ All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.
__
_ Jhn 6:38__ For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me.
__
_ Jhn 6:39__ And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day.

Jhn 6:44__ No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jhn 6:27 Labour not for the meat which perisheth, but for that meat which endureth unto everlasting life, which the Son of man shall give unto you: for him hath God the Father sealed.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Act 4:28 For to do whatsoever thy hand and thy counsel determined before to be done
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Rom 8:30 Moreover whom he did predestinate , them he also called : and whom he called them he also justified and whom he justified , them he also glorified .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1Cr 2:7 But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery , [even] the hidden [wisdom], which God ordained before the world unto our glory
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eph 1:5 Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself according to the good pleasure of his will ,
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eph 1:11 In whom also we have obtained an inheritance , being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will :
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rom 8:14__ For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gal 1:15__ But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother's womb, and called [me] by his grace,
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Act 13:48 And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


It is the doctrine of the bible and it is the doctrine of the reformation

http://www.visi.com/~contra_m/cm/features2/cm98_bm_luther.html

 No, the doctrine of the reformation was resisting unto death the falsity of popery. Confessing Christ even at the pains of death and torture at the hands of those who would have dominion spiritually AND temporally.

 That many held to the doctrine of predestination so radically is simply a sidebar. It need not have been so.

 

[rnmomof7]

Today at 06:49 AM nikolai_42 said this in Post #263




 No, the doctrine of the reformation was resisting unto death the falsity of popery. Confessing Christ even at the pains of death and torture at the hands of those who would have dominion spiritually AND temporally.

 That many held to the doctrine of predestination so radically is simply a sidebar. It need not have been so.

The reformation was correcting the doctrinal error of the Catholic Church ..ONE of which was indulgences .

Your statement shows that you do not understand the reformation..ALL non Catholics were either predestinarian or ana Baptist,there were no other choices.
Luther was a student of Augiustine that taught predestination.

Untill _James Arminius and later Wesley came along all Protestaints believed what is now called the "TULIP"
In fact to only REAL protestants are "Calvinists" the other were from as a counter reformation (some say with the hellp of the jesuits)

You need to study a bit of church history

To your opinion that it was a "sidebar"

"I give you hearty praise and commendation on this further account - that you alone, in contrast with all others, have attacked the real thing, that is, the essential issue. You have not wearied me with those extraneous issues about the Papacy, purgatory, indulgences and such like - trifles, rather than issues - in respect of which almost all to date have sought my blood (though without success); you, and you alone, have seen the hinge on which all turns, and aimed for the vital spot.[3]

Martin Luther, The Bondage of the Will, (Grand Rapids: Fleming H. Revell, 1992) p.319.

He wrote Bondage of the will ...a book which deals with His doctrine

read the link
http://www.visi.com/~contra_m/cm/features2/cm98_bm_luther.html

 

[nikolai_42]

Today at 12:07 PM rnmomof7 said this in Post #264




The reformation was correcting the doctrinal error of the Catholic Church ..ONE of which was indulgences .

Your statement shows that you do not understand the reformation..ALL non Catholics were either predestinarian or ana Baptist,there were no other choices.
Luther was a student of Augiustine that taught predestination.

Untill _James Arminius and later Wesley came along all Protestaints believed what is now called the "TULIP"
In fact to only REAL protestants are "Calvinists" the other were from as a counter reformation (some say with the hellp of the jesuits)

You need to study a bit of church history

To your opinion that it was a "sidebar"

"I give you hearty praise and commendation on this further account - that you alone, in contrast with all others, have attacked the real thing, that is, the essential issue. You have not wearied me with those extraneous issues about the Papacy, purgatory, indulgences and such like - trifles, rather than issues - in respect of which almost all to date have sought my blood (though without success); you, and you alone, have seen the hinge on which all turns, and aimed for the vital spot.[3]

Martin Luther, The Bondage of the Will, (Grand Rapids: Fleming H. Revell, 1992) p.319.

He wrote Bondage of the will ...a book which deals with His doctrine

read the link
http://www.visi.com/~contra_m/cm/features2/cm98_bm_luther.html

 I don't have a great deal of time at the moment, but one thought comes to mind. The man whose name personifies the doctrine of predestination today used the same means to suppress his main opponent as did the Roman Catholics their opponents - torture and death for dissent.

 

[rnmomof7]

Today at 11:23 AM nikolai_42 said this in Post #265




 I don't have a great deal of time at the moment, but one thought comes to mind. The man whose name personifies the doctrine of predestination today used the same means to suppress his main opponent as did the Roman Catholics their opponents - torture and death for dissent.

Calvin was an appointed government offical ..He represented a government with a position on Heretics.

He followed the law at that time..which as you have noted was the cultural norm..

At 27 he wrote "The Institutes" a systematic study of doctrine. So the faith of the reformation carries his name as a "nickname"
it is the doctrine found throughout the bible..

Instead of attacking the messenger (be it Rome or Calvin or Arminius [who lied and deceived to promote his doctrine] ) lets stick to what the doctrine said.

It is an interesting study to see how doctrine has changed.
But for sure the earliest protesters were by defination "calvinists" ..

 

[nikolai_42]

Today at 12:46 PM rnmomof7 said this in Post #266




Calvin was an appointed government offical ..He represented a government with a position on Heretics.

He followed the law at that time..which as you have noted was the cultural norm..

At 27 he wrote "The Institutes" a systematic study of doctrine. So the faith of the reformation carries his name as a "nickname"
it is the doctrine found throughout the bible..

Instead of attacking the messenger (be it Rome or Calvin or Arminius [who lied and deceived to promote his doctrine] ) lets stick to what the doctrine said.

It is an interesting study to see how doctrine has changed.
But for sure the earliest protesters were by defination "calvinists" ..

It was merely an observation in the light of the Reformation which indeed brought some religious freedom to the nations. In places such as England and Scotland, men did exactly as Servetus did - died because of what they believed. Except in the case of the Reformers, their deaths were effectual. But what I was noting was the similarity of the Catholic inquisition against heretics (same shoe, different foot) and Calvin vs. Servetus. Catholic burnings were the norm for the day as well, but that doesn't make it right. " Three things come to mind immediately: 1. The woman at the well whom Jesus did NOT condemn but simply told her to go and sin no more (as the Pharisees were getting set to stone her) 2. By their fruits you shall know them (in the light of Matthew 5, such burnings do NOT reflect well on the 'inflicters') and 3. They shall put you out of the synagogues: yea, the time cometh, that whosoever killeth you will think that he doeth God service.


Don't get me wrong, I have read much of what the Reformation did, and what a testimony the faith of many a reformer was. But in reading of the effectual witnesses - those who did make a lasting mark, and whose faith was most humble and powerful - I found no mention of Calvinism nor of defending predestination. Simply a refutation of Popish inventions. Yes, the will of man was enshrined by the Catholic Church, but in no way does that defend the Calvinistic doctrine.

 

[rnmomof7]

Today at 11:53 AM nikolai_42 said this in Post #267




It was merely an observation in the light of the Reformation which indeed brought some religious freedom to the nations. In places such as England and Scotland, men did exactly as Servetus did - died because of what they believed. Except in the case of the Reformers, their deaths were effectual. But what I was noting was the similarity of the Catholic inquisition against heretics (same shoe, different foot) and Calvin vs. Servetus. Catholic burnings were the norm for the day as well, but that doesn't make it right. " Three things come to mind immediately: 1. The woman at the well whom Jesus did NOT condemn but simply told her to go and sin no more (as the Pharisees were getting set to stone her) 2. By their fruits you shall know them (in the light of Matthew 5, such burnings do NOT reflect well on the 'inflicters') and 3. They shall put you out of the synagogues: yea, the time cometh, that whosoever killeth you will think that he doeth God service.


Don't get me wrong, I have read much of what the Reformation did, and what a testimony the faith of many a reformer was. But in reading of the effectual witnesses - those who did make a lasting mark, and whose faith was most humble and powerful - I found no mention of Calvinism nor of defending predestination. Simply a refutation of Popish inventions. Yes, the will of man was enshrined by the Catholic Church, but in no way does that defend the Calvinistic doctrine.

I suspect you never really looked at the doctrine closely.
Luthers "bondage of the will" was a basic 'Calvinist" piece of work for the reformation.

Here is a link you may like when you have time. I was raised Catholic and then went to a Wesleyan doctrine ...untill I became a Calvinist I had no clue that the Wesleyans were not "protestants" in the classical sense because they were really protesting the reformation in a way.
History and the documents speak to the truth of what I say ...

You do need to read some on it..

http://history.hanover.edu/early/prot.htm

On Luther

http://www.humboldt.edu/~wh1/466.Reformation/466.LutherDoctrine.html

 

[Ragman]

The reason Calvinists think that Calvinism brings glory to God is because they believe they are elect. If they were "non-elect" they would sing a different tune.

 

[rnmomof7]

Yesterday at 10:34 PM Ragman said this in Post #269

The reason Calvinists think that Calvinism brings glory to God is because they believe they are elect. If they were "non-elect" they would sing a different tune.

Rag..the non elect do not want to be elect..they are doing and believeing exactly what they want to do and will to believe. God has not removed on thing from them.

How does Calvinism give God glory when other doctrines do not?

Well a Calvinist believe that they do not deserve the grace and mercy of God..That if God had not chosen to save then with His grace and mercy they would get exactly what they deserve HELL. God is the "Author and finisher" of their salvation.
Rag that does not lead to any personal pride..it is very humbling. All Glory to God.

On the other hand those that reject Calvinism too believe in the mercy of God..but they see it as a wage paid to them by a grateful god for them electing him.
To the non Calvinist "choice" is god . Their will is stronger than Gods grace.

For them salvation is not completed at the cross , Jesus may have died for none

Stiring sermon + "just as I am"+ altar call + mans choice + sinners prayer + the blood of Christ =SALVATION
Christ is only one part of salvation.. Actually it is mostly about man

Wha is god in this? God or man who gets the glory? ( And do remember all the times when you heard the bragging about how many people I saved or were saved at the service)

Salvation is all of men..Mens works and mens choices..God gets the crumbs from the table.

 

[nikolai_42]

Today at 12:15 PM rnmomof7 said this in Post #270




Rag..the non elect do not want to be elect..they are doing and believeing exactly what they want to do and will to believe. God has not removed on thing from them.

How does Calvinism give God glory when other doctrines do not?

Well a Calvinist believe that they do not deserve the grace and mercy of God..That if God had not chosen to save then with His grace and mercy they would get exactly what they deserve HELL. God is the "Author and finisher" of their salvation.
Rag that does not lead to any personal pride..it is very humbling. All Glory to God.

On the other hand those that reject Calvinism too believe in the mercy of God..but they see it as a wage paid to them by a grateful god for them electing him.
To the non Calvinist "choice" is god . Their will is stronger than Gods grace.

For them salvation is not completed at the cross , Jesus may have died for none

Stiring sermon + "just as I am"+ altar call + mans choice + sinners prayer + the blood of Christ =SALVATION
Christ is only one part of salvation.. Actually it is mostly about man

Wha is god in this? God or man who gets the glory? ( And do remember all the times when you heard the bragging about how many people I saved or were saved at the service)

Salvation is all of men..Mens works and mens choices..God gets the crumbs from the table.

 Sounds to me like the only real difference between Calvinism and universalism is the numbers.

 

[frumanchu]

 Sounds to me like the only real difference between Calvinism and universalism is the numbers.

And the only thing that separates Arminianism from universalism is inconsitency

 

[rnmomof7]

Today at 12:27 PM nikolai_42 said this in Post #271




 Sounds to me like the only real difference between Calvinism and universalism is the numbers.

Would you please explain any similarity between the two

 

[nikolai_42]

Today at 03:08 PM rnmomof7 said this in Post #273

Would you please explain any similarity between the two

Both systems have an 'elect' (though universalism doesn't use the term) that are saved without regard to the worthiness and with little regard for the 'will' of man (as separate from that which God gives the man). Both systems say that the blood of Christ was efficaciously slain for a specific people - that there is nothing those (or any others) can do to change that. In effect, the will of man (as separate from the Will of God) is superceded by the Will and Purposes of God.  The only serious difference (in the end) between the two doctrines is the numbers. Calvinism and universalism both have an 'elect' that are to be saved. In Calvinism, that number (though unknown) is very finite. In universalism, that number encompasses every single soul that ever lived (with the possible exception of Satan and His minions - though there are some that believe that even Satan will eventually be brought around). Both systems, however, do say that the glory of God is gained - not in man 'deciding' to follow Jesus, but in man being apprehended by Christ.  There is no personal glory in either proposal, but in both cases, the glory goes to the Saviour. There is no room for boasting.

 

[rnmomof7]

Today at 02:22 PM nikolai_42 said this in Post #274




Both systems have an 'elect' (though universalism doesn't use the term) that are saved without regard to the worthiness and with little regard for the 'will' of man (as separate from that which God gives the man).

So you think a man must be worthy to be saved? Do you believe he is saved by his works?

Both systems say that the blood of Christ was efficaciously slain for a specific people - that there is nothing those (or any others) can do to change that. In effect, the will of man (as separate from the Will of God) is superceded by the Will and Purposes of God. 

So God has nothing to do with who is saved? It is all mens choice?

The only serious difference (in the end) between the two doctrines is the numbers. Calvinism and universalism both have an 'elect' that are to be saved. In Calvinism, that number (though unknown) is very finite. In universalism, that number encompasses every single soul that ever lived (with the possible exception of Satan and His minions - though there are some that believe that even Satan will eventually be brought around). Both systems, however, do say that the glory of God is gained - not in man 'deciding' to follow Jesus, but in man being apprehended by Christ.  There is no personal glory in either proposal, but in both cases, the glory goes to the Saviour. There is no room for boasting.

There is actually a huge difference..universalism is closer to Arminian theology as all men may presume to be saved if they decide to be .
In both cases Jesus saved no one at the cross..

 

[nikolai_42]

Today at 03:35 PM rnmomof7 said this in Post #275

So you think a man must be worthy to be saved? Do you believe he is saved by his works?

So God has nothing to do with who is saved? It is all mens choice?

Absolutely not. There is a part, I believe, for choice in man's walk with God, but I believe it goes FAR deeper than the will of man. I see something at work between "deep"s rather than any conscious decision (which, in the end, can only be mental and, thus, very poor in power when it comes to eternal matters). In many ways it is like a simple testing of what is in a man, but that said, there is NOTHING stopping anyone from apprehending Christ (save his own nature).

There is actually a huge difference..universalism is closer to Arminian theology as all men may presume to be saved if they decide to be .
In both cases Jesus saved no one at the cross..

 I have no idea how you can come to this conclusion. What men presume and what they do not presume has little bearing on the blessings God bestows on them. Calvinism limits how many Christ saved to a small number. Universalism makes the work and act of salvation finished in Christ. No decision in either case - both of Christ alone. In both cases, Jesus saved a specific number at the cross. In Arminianism, the number is uncertain. It is the only construct of the three in which it is possible that Christ saved no one at the cross.

 

[rnmomof7]

Today at 02:48 PM nikolai_42 said this in Post #276



Absolutely not. There is a part, I believe, for choice in man's walk with God, but I believe it goes FAR deeper than the will of man. I see something at work between "deep"s rather than any conscious decision (which, in the end, can only be mental and, thus, very poor in power when it comes to eternal matters). In many ways it is like a simple testing of what is in a man, but that said, there is NOTHING stopping anyone from apprehending Christ (save his own nature).

The test of man was held in the garden of Eden. Adam was the representive of all men.
He had ONE commandment and he could not keep that.
God knows well what we are and how we will react to every test. We will react just like Adam.
There is something stopping man from that if you believe the Bible..are you a christian?

 I have no idea how you can come to this conclusion. What men presume and what they do not presume has little bearing on the blessings God bestows on them. Calvinism limits how many Christ saved to a small number. Universalism makes the work and act of salvation finished in Christ. No decision in either case - both of Christ alone. In both cases, Jesus saved a specific number at the cross. In Arminianism, the number is uncertain. It is the only construct of the three in which it is possible that Christ saved no one at the cross.

You are saying two different things here that are in complete opposition if I understand you correctly. You are saying that God bestows blessing on men without their input.

Was anyone saved at the cross?

 

[nikolai_42]

Today at 04:01 PM rnmomof7 said this in Post #277

The test of man was held in the garden of Eden. Adam was the representive of all men.
He had ONE commandment and he could not keep that.
God knows well what we are and how we will react to every test. We will react just like Adam.
There is something stopping man from that if you believe the Bible..are you a christian?

  That's why I said what I said (man's nature keeps him from going to God much less pleasing Him). That it was in parentheses may have been misleading. It was emphasis via understatement. Probably doesn't work too well in this medium.

You are saying two different things here that are in complete opposition if I understand you correctly. You are saying that God bestows blessing on men without their input.

Was anyone saved at the cross?

 To prevent any further breakdown in understanding, let me ask you to explain how you think I'm saying two different things here. What I was saying was that God does not bestow blessings on men simply because they are good or deserving or have done anything to please Him. There are those that obey Him, and they are not without blessing, but many blessings of God are simply out of grace and nothing else. Others out of proximity to His obedient ones. God blesses for His own reasons. But to take this any further without qualification would be very tangential.

 Was anyone saved at the cross? Was anyone doomed at the cross? Were those disobedient spirits predestined for disobedience and then for salvation?

 

[frumanchu]

Absolutely not. There is a part, I believe, for choice in man's walk with God, but I believe it goes FAR deeper than the will of man. I see something at work between "deep"s rather than any conscious decision (which, in the end, can only be mental and, thus, very poor in power when it comes to eternal matters). In many ways it is like a simple testing of what is in a man, but that said, there is NOTHING stopping anyone from apprehending Christ (save his own nature).

Calvinism limits how many Christ saved to a small number.

Many are called but few are chosen. Any theological position in regards to salvation outside of universalism 'limits' the number saved.

Universalism makes the work and act of salvation finished in Christ. No decision in either case - both of Christ alone.

In Arminianism, the number is uncertain.

The only 'construct' in which the number IS certain is universalism. All others agree that not all will be saved, and thus it is a 'limited' number. Whether the Arminian or Calvinist position is true, adherents to either cannot possible know either the number or the members. Election is a Biblical fact. We're simply arguing over the definition

 

[nikolai_42]

Today at 04:13 PM frumanchu said this in Post #279

Many are called but few are chosen. Any theological position in regards to salvation outside of universalism 'limits' the number saved.

 Not so. Arminianism allows for the possibility of all men coming to Christ. But only if all men decide to on their own. At least that's my understanding of it.

The only 'construct' in which the number IS certain is universalism. All others agree that not all will be saved, and thus it is a 'limited' number. Whether the Arminian or Calvinist position is true, adherents to either cannot possible know either the number or the members. Election is a Biblical fact. We're simply arguing over the definition

 Not as I understand Calvinism. Those who are predestined WILL be saved. All others will not. The only uncertainty is that men (apparently) have no way of knowing who or how many are predestined to salvation - but that it is certain that not all are predestined to salvation. Under universalism, ALL are predestined to some degree of abundant life. Even under universalism, there is no present count of believers - because, as the scripture says - Christ is to be testified to all men in due time. In universalist parlance, that means that all men will eventually receive the testimony of Christ and be drawn to Him. Calvinism says that all that are predestined to be drawn will have Christ testified to them.